Ron Paul #1

94 posts / 0 new
Last post
rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Great video of NH debate
mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Ron Paul would prably show up pretty well if only AMG could manage to conduct a simple internal poll uninterrupted by bloviation.

If that's the case, and if he's also so popular on YouTube and the like, why doesn't he register higher than the very low single numbers in professional polls conducted nationally?

Michelle Anderson
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 12 months ago
Joined: 11/03/2003 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]If that's the case, and if he's also so popular on YouTube and the like, why doesn't he register higher than the very low single numbers in professional polls conducted nationally?[/quote]

I've wondered the same thing. All I can come up with is the Technological Divide.

1. Those who vote on YouTube are less likely to use landlines, instead using cell phones, thereby leaving them out of the phone polls.

2. Who on the internet goes the NBC, ABC, CBS, or even CNN for their news?

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul Supporters MeetUp

"Paul is one of the few Republican presidential candidates who is successfully using the organizing power of the internet, at least so far, according to Stern. Paul’s campaign site claims 8,223 Meetup members with 224 groups in 206 cities in five countries that have put together 184 'events.'"

[url=http://www.pulsetc.com/article.php?sid=3279]Pulse of the Twin Cities, 06/07/07[/url]

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]Ron Paul would prably show up pretty well if only AMG could manage to conduct a simple internal poll uninterrupted by bloviation.

If that's the case, and if he's also so popular on YouTube and the like, why doesn't he register higher than the very low single numbers in professional polls conducted nationally?[/quote]

If you don't ask the question....

Hildy Johnson
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 8 months ago
Joined: 04/19/2007 - 4:53pm
Ron Paul #1

[quote="Michelle Anderson"][quote="mediadog"] why doesn't he register higher than the very low single numbers in professional polls conducted nationally?[/quote]

1. Those who vote on YouTube are less likely to use landlines, instead using cell phones, thereby leaving them out of the phone polls.[/quote]

It goes beyond that. These "scientific" phone polls only reach folk who have land lines AND, in many cases, who don't have caller ID. I mean, when some computerized auto poll thing calls me from "out of area" or "unknown caller" or even some number I don't recognize, I don't bother to bick up.

So, I think that's why certain candidates do well in "scientific" polls, because they happen to appeal to folks who fit the critera of A) home, B) have land line, C) willing to pick up call from unknown number.

Frankly, I think the scientific polls have Obama underpolled vs. reality.

Virgil Kane
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 12/15/2005 - 12:44pm
Ron Paul #1

Utah Republican Party Presidential Straw Poll [url=http://www.sltrib.com/ci_6106279]results[/url] (06-09-07):

[b]1.[/b] Mitt Romney

[b]2.[/b] Ron Paul

[b]3.[/b] Rudy Guliani

[b]4.[/b] John McCain

oldfox
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 5 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2007 - 4:36am
Ron Paul #1

Depends on what polls you look at:

[quote]MSNBC has put out their bi-weekly GOP rankings. Rudy, Mitt, and McCain are at the top with Fred Thompson in 4th. Ron Paul is making a move up due to his web savvy, and Mike Huckabee is at the top of the “2nd tier.”
The Race looks to be shaping up as we had predicted - let’s see what the upcoming months will bring. The complete rankings are:
1. Rudy Giuliani, 2. Mitt Romney, 3. John McCain, 4. Fred Thompson, 5. Mike Huckabee, 6. Newt Gingrich, 7. Sam Brownback, 8. Tom Tancredo, 9. Duncan Hunter, 10. Tommy Thompson, [b]11. Ron Paul[/b], 12. Jim Gilmore[/quote]

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Ron Paul in 11th place? Ahead of Jim Gilmore but behind Tommy (not Fred) Thompson? Not exactly the showing one would expect after reading the many pro-Paul posts in this thread.

Corvus
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 03/10/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

You call that a poll, oldfox? Here's the link and what it says: [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16711064/[/url]

[quote]These rankings are ordered by likelihood of winning the Republican Party primary and are based on a number of factors, including organization, money, buzz and polling. [/quote]

LarryinAugusta
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/25/2007 - 6:53pm
Ron Paul #1

[quote="oldfox"]Depends on what polls you look at:

[quote]MSNBC has put out their bi-weekly GOP rankings. Rudy, Mitt, and McCain are at the top with Fred Thompson in 4th. Ron Paul is making a move up due to his web savvy, and Mike Huckabee is at the top of the “2nd tier.”
The Race looks to be shaping up as we had predicted - let’s see what the upcoming months will bring. The complete rankings are:
1. Rudy Giuliani, 2. Mitt Romney, 3. John McCain, 4. Fred Thompson, 5. Mike Huckabee, 6. Newt Gingrich, 7. Sam Brownback, 8. Tom Tancredo, 9. Duncan Hunter, 10. Tommy Thompson, [b]11. Ron Paul[/b], 12. Jim Gilmore[/quote][/quote]

This is not a poll but only who MSNBC would like to see win the nomination. Weird that Paul would not be higher, arguably he has had the most buzz (Thompson people are going to be all over me) and in the last month has raise around 5 million. Somthing stinks :evil:

Disclamer from the MSNBC website: [b]These rankings are ordered by likelihood of winning the Republican Party primary and are based on a number of factors, including organization, money, buzz and polling.[/b]

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Just a bunch of internet spammers

"Congressman Ron Paul’s donations have moved up - not by hundreds of
thousands - but by millions as a result of his debate performances and
groundswell of support on the Internet and in New Hampshire, observers
close to the campaign say. The move is especially impressive since as of
March 31, 2007, he had perhaps $500,000 on hand (see candidate estimates
below). ..." [url]http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=43192[/url]

[b]Just a bunch of internet spammers sending their fiat money Federal Reserve notes to the campaign...[/b]

Mary1
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Joined: 06/30/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul #1

I've gotta say - watching the videos of Ron Paul on UTube is making me lean in his favor.

When I went home for a visit last weekend my younger brother urged me to look into him and I'm glad I did. He seems to be the only "real" candidate. I like how he comes right out and answers questions point blank rather than just running around the bush like others.

What do people on this forum think about his assertion that it was our occupation and past bombing of the middle east that motivated 9/11?

People really seem to be hostile to the idea that it was our own arrogance that caused the second Pearl Harbor...

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

The "Blame America" crowd continues to defy all the facts and all common sense. Incredible.

LarryinAugusta
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/25/2007 - 6:53pm
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]The "Blame America" crowd continues to defy all the facts and all common sense. Incredible.[/quote]
Enlighten me media dog. Who's the blame america crowd and who has the common sense the stick your head in the sand crowd:)

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Do you believe the U.S. caused 9/11, Larry?

LarryinAugusta
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/25/2007 - 6:53pm
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]Do you believe the U.S. caused 9/11, Larry?[/quote]

Do you believe that Ron Paul said that? I will use one of Paul’s analogies’. If someone is murdered and you look for motive are you blaming the murder victim? I don’t think so; I think you are trying to figure out why the person was murdered.

I think that you would have bury your head in the sand not to recognize that our foreign policy contributes to these peoples hatred of us :wink:

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 1 week ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Ron Paul #1

After years of being mislead by those "professionals" in Washington I can see why Ron Paul would be so popular.

All of the top-tier candidates offer us nothing of substance and there support is just soft, they are the popular ones running for president. They offer nothing of substance to the American voter, perhaps the only one that comes even close is Fred Thompson but in-deed his record will need to be looked at as every other.

If the MSM took time to cover folks like Ron Paul and Sam Brownback the world would be a better place because in my mind they would find men who are constant about what they beleive in and that they act in office the same way they run. (You won't have to lobby Sam Brownback or Ron Paul) You will get the government you vote for.

Too many times Bush has to be lobbied to act like a conserative The War, Harriett Myers, Immigration, etc...

How about a president we don't have to lobby there are many 2nd tier candidates that we won't have to do this too...

LarryinAugusta
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/25/2007 - 6:53pm
Ron Paul #1

Great post GOP. I couldn't agree with you more.

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Larry: 19 Islamo-Fascists came to this country and killed more than 3,000 Americans. Others like them would welcome a chance to come here and kill more of us, and if enough of us begin to think like Ron Paul and let our guard down they will surely have a better opportunity.

Don't buy into the canard that Americans are universally hated. As a I pointed out in a post yesterday, Canada, Mexico, Germany and France (where the elites love to display their anti-Americanism) all have recently elected heads of state that are friendly to the U.S. And just yesterday, the President was greeted with enthusiasm by citizens of the small Muslim state of Albania, one of many countries in that region that are thankful for U.S. help.

The haters -- those who hate their own governments, Americans, westerners in general and Christians in particular -- are a relatively small number of religious fanatics we know as Al-Queda. No foreigh policy except complete compliance with their aim to establish a caliphate would satisfy them.

LarryinAugusta
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/25/2007 - 6:53pm
Ron Paul #1

Mediadog,

Can you name a country that has been attacked by Islamic fundamentalist that is not directly involves in the Middle East. I mean countries that have troops over their. Why must the US always make the sacrifice? Just like the European defense shield, why should we pay for it? I need my home security system updated, does anyone want to help me out and foot the bill?

Keep on believe that we need to police the world and we will never be out of danger.

Mary1
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Joined: 06/30/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul #1

I agree, Larry. We cannot police the entire world.

I agree with what Ron has to say on foreign policy. If we are going to invade countries based on our belief that their level of democracy is not "good enough" we will forever be at war.

I think he is an intelligent person who is able to see both sides of every issue and make sound decisions based on [i]facts[/i], not simply towing the party line.

hatchcar
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 10 months ago
Joined: 11/28/1999 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Mary, you're very perspective in your comments.
In response to mediadog, I just say this: Do you consider the American government and it's people the same entity, or do you see them as two different institutions?

Corvus
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 03/10/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

I'll attempt to make an analogy that maybe everyone can understand.

Two people live in the same neighborhood. One is a loud, boozy, porn-addicted white guy that goes to church on Sunday. His neighbor a few doors down is a militant Islamic. They pass each other on the street and give each other dirty looks for 10 years, but there are no confrontations between the two of them.

One day, the white guy goes into the Islamic guy's yard and decides to plant a garden.

In retaliation, the Islamic guy blows up the white guy's house.

Apparently, many people would say that the Islamic guy blew up the white guy's house because he is loud, boozy, porn-addicted and goes to church on Sunday.

Ron Paul would say that the Islamic guy blew up the white guy's house because the white guy planted a garden in the Islamic guy's yard.

Most of you would then misinterpret Ron Paul's statement to mean that the white guy DESERVED to have his house blown up.

Saying that a reaction was caused by a certain action is NOT the same as justifying that reaction; it's an attempt to understand the big picture.

Robert
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 4 months ago
Joined: 04/01/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]Larry: 19 Islamo-Fascists came to this country and killed more than 3,000 Americans. Others like them would welcome a chance to come here and kill more of us, and if enough of us begin to think like Ron Paul and let our guard down they will surely have a better opportunity.
[/quote]

If Ron Paul was president, those 19 Islamos wouldn't have been in the US. Ron Paul believes in a strong military for national defense, not empire building.

hatchcar
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 10 months ago
Joined: 11/28/1999 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

Corvus, I'm just speechless. You're able to grasp this problem with such clarity, I'm simply amazed. Let me create another analogy that might even explain it better.

There's a nice quite neighborhood, but there's a hornet's nest that is nearby in one of the trees in the neighborhood. It's like having a small pebble in your shoe. You know it's there, but it's not really bugging you all that much. Then one day, one of the neighbors decided he's had enough, and took out his baseball bat, and went to the nest, and hit it out of the ballpark.

That's what is going on in the Mid East now.

mediadog
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 03/27/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul #1

[quote="Mary1"]

I agree with what Ron has to say on foreign policy. If we are going to invade countries based on our belief that their level of democracy is not "good enough" we will forever be at war.

[/quote]

Mary, the fact is we "invaded" Afghanistan and Iraq only after after we were attacked and 3,000 Americans were killed in 9/11. The Islamo-Fascists were trying to kill Americans long before that. Remember the first attempt to bring down the twin towers? The bombing of the USS Cole? The destruction of the US Embassy buildings in Tazania and Kenya? The foiled plots to bring down a dozen airliners over the Pacific?

These are the same fanatics who have killed hundreds in terrorist attacks in other countries. From Britain to Spain to Saudi Arabia to Indonesia. Would you prefer to sit back and allow this worldwide jihad to continue? Do you really believe that our foreign policy is to blame for this continuing carnage?

None of our actions have been on the basis of raising "the level of democracy" anywhere. Our goal is to protect this country and others from these attacks by a strain of Muslim religious fanatics who would love to kill us all, including me, you, the hand-wringing Mr. Paul and just about any other non-believer.

Virgil Kane
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 12/15/2005 - 12:44pm
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"]Do you believe the U.S. caused 9/11, Larry?[/quote]

That is not Ron Paul's position.

[quote="mediadog"]Don't buy into the canard that Americans are universally hated.[/quote]

That is not Ron Paul's position.

[quote="mediadog"]Do you really believe that our foreign policy is to blame for this continuing carnage? [/quote]

That is not Ron Paul's position.

Virgil Kane
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 12/15/2005 - 12:44pm
Ron Paul #1

In the words of Vincent Vega: "I'm not saying it's right. But you're saying a foot massage don't mean nothing, and I'm saying it does."

Mary1
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 7 months ago
Joined: 06/30/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul #1

[quote="mediadog"] Mary, the fact is we "invaded" Afghanistan and Iraq only after after we were attacked and 3,000 Americans were killed in 9/11. The Islamo-Fascists were trying to kill Americans long before that. Remember the first attempt to bring down the twin towers? The bombing of the USS Cole? The destruction of the US Embassy buildings in Tazania and Kenya? The foiled plots to bring down a dozen airliners over the Pacific?

These are the same fanatics who have killed hundreds in terrorist attacks in other countries. From Britain to Spain to Saudi Arabia to Indonesia. Would you prefer to sit back and allow this worldwide jihad to continue? Do you really believe that our foreign policy is to blame for this continuing carnage?

None of our actions have been on the basis of raising "the level of democracy" anywhere. Our goal is to protect this country and others from these attacks by a strain of Muslim religious fanatics who would love to kill us all, including me, you, the hand-wringing Mr. Paul and just about any other non-believer.[/quote]

This is why I wish I had a better history teacher in HS. I have very limited knowledge of U.S. and foreign history at best.

I try to make up for my ignorance by looking things up on-line or in books when I hear a theory of interest, or when I find politicians weaving a story with particular vigilence.

For several years we've heard about how the radical Islamists are out to get us, they want to kill us simply because they hate Christianity and democracy etc etc. Americans love a good vs. evil story, and what better way to get a nation to rally together than to tell them a group of people in a place most Americans couldn't even point out on a map is threatening our way of life.

It makes us feel so much better to think the people who want to hurt us are crazy, rather then contemplate the idea that misguided foreign policies may have motivated an attack.

It just seems too simple an explanation.

I think what Ron Paul says makes sense. He doesn't claim that the Islamists are the true victims - he comes right out and says, even quotes Reagan's memoirs, the radical Islamists are nuts. They have no respect for women, they don't like democracy, they have little to no respect for human life - you can't reason with them.

But even as crazy as they are, they obviously have their stuff together as far as recruitment and training etc seems to go - they aren't stupid. Why then, would they waste their energy and resources attacking us, unless we were seen as some sort of threat?

And Ron Paul doesn't advocate for putting our tail between our legs either - after the 9/11 attacks he advised doing some type of mission (can't remember the right name for it) that would basically send bounty hunters out to capture Bin Laden. He didn't want to start a war that would not win.

The idea of Bush and others was that bringing a U.S. level democracy to the middle east would help get rid of Islamic facists. But do you know how many obstacles are in place before a middle eastern democracy could be a success? (I do - I wrote a 30 page thesis paper on it for my political science degree). There are A LOT.

Bottom line is, I think this country is headed in the wrong direction and is getting off course. Ron Paul is at least consistent in following the ideals of our forefathers and the Constitution and I think he'll get us back on track.

Pages

Log in to post comments